Strange. The GOP announced their latest iteration of “Contract With America” at a business in Sterling today, and some local activists managed to figure out where it would be. When they arrived, they weren’t allowed to go in. Here’s a comment from one of them: “Why have it at a business in Northern Virginia, expressing the plan to help Americans, but not allow any Americans to be there?”

The disconnect between the Republican establishment and the American people is alive and well, I suppose.

The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed.
You can also pingback or trackback
from your own site.

6 Comments

Good point about the attendence, Greg. That’s the difference between a top down organization and a bottom up organization. The latter may be messier but will always better reflect the views of the people. Grass roots is always the stronger way to go. Limit grass roots involvement and support will invariably dwindle.

I like elements of the contact but I find others unnecessary. All laws are already required to be constitutional by virtue of the, well, constitution (duh). Adding a sentence to each new law explaining why it is constitutional seems superfluous.

At a time when America needs a bold, simple, fresh plan for putting America on the path to fiscal and constitutional sanity - we get instead an almost 8000 word term paper of inside-the-beltway regurgitation that lacks the one thing the American people seem to be dying to have… actual leadership. Harsh? Hardly.

1. The Pledge fails to address the single greatest threat to our nation’s long term fiscal health - the fact that we have precisely $0 set aside for the more than $106 trillion in unfunded liabilities staring us in the face for social security, medicare and medicaid. Instead, we get more of the same political rhetoric about seniors standing to lose Medicare because of Obamacare. MEDICARE IS BANKRUPT. SOCIAL SECURITY IS BANKRUPT. FOR GOODNESS SAKE, MAN UP AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

2. The Pledge blatantly fails to even mention earmarks, much less calling for a ban on them. The issue here isn’t about how much money we will save. The issue is about Congressional arrogance - and their naked addiction to using your tax dollars to try to buy off your votes back home.

3. The Pledge offers no significant, concrete plan to reduce spending such as a Balanced Budget Amendment or a Spending Limit Amendment, relying instead on gimmicks like weekly votes on spending cuts and hiring freezes, as well as nebulous promises to cap spending.

4. And perhaps most troubling of all, the Pledge adopts the nonsensical “repeal and replace” mantra for Obamacare - offering as replacement yet more federal government mandates regarding pre-existing conditions and lifetime caps on benefits, which begs the question: which mandates are unconstitutional and which ones are not, GOP? And, STOP WITH THE MANDATES. STOP IT. MANDATING THAT INSURERS COVER PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS IS JUST AS BAD AS THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE ON ITS FACE - BUT WORSE, YOU IDIOTS, IT WILL LEAD TO AN INDIVIDUAL MANDATE BECAUSE YOU CANNOT COVER THE ALREADY SICK WITHOUT MANDATING THAT THE HEALTHY PARTICIPATE. JUST STOP IT.

In one asinine move, the GOP House leadership demonstrated that it is more interested in votes than in changing Washington and that it has learned nothing. In fact, all you need to know is that the ever-inspiring and bold David Frum wrote yesterday about the Pledge, “GOP to Tea Party: Your Votes Yes, Your Ideas No.”

If the “new” republicans want redemption and to be taken seriously they need to expose the folly of the Clinton budget surplus and show the American people where, when and how fast they will slash government spending. Period.

Not only a repeal of the recent budget busters by the White House and congress but a stated commitment to further budget reduction should be a qualifier for any support, Tea Party or otherwise.

The Clinton budget surplus came about with a republican majority in the house and senate under the 104th, 105th and 106th congress, in spite of a 30% increase in spending due to an 86% increase in tax revenue.

The American people are not interested in the continued replay of that kind of hocus pocus voodoo from either party.

Unfortunately they will not get the job done with any majority if it is populated with multi-term poltroons.

Remember people, were not all of the economic policies of financial deregulation is what got the economy in the state it is in? Did the tax cuts in effect keep us from getting into the financial mess we are in now? With all this extra money they have had, they pulled out of investments to hord cash! Eisenhower built the interstate highway system with high taxes. Please tell me that the spending by goverment with high taxes did not benefit everyone and the nation as a whole? We payed for the cold war with taxes people much the same way that we should be paying for war like we used to.

Let’s say you really thought the military needed to buy another 1000 HumVees. Maybe they told you they needed them. So you want to allocate money to buy them.

Well, they are built in Mishawaka, Indiana. Spending the money will send the money to the plant there. Is that an “earmark” (defined legally as a spending item that by necessity puts money into a specific district)?

We all understand what we mean when we say “ban earmarks” — we want them to stop putting in spending items for things that are no business of Government, which are meant to buy votes either for a bill, or from the residents of a district for their representative.

But earmarks are only a small part of the unconstitutional spending of the federal government on local items; most of that spending is generalized, like education dollars or transportation money distributed generally across the states.

If we can’t BAN those, you almost don’t want to ban legislation that would specify what those funds will be used for — lest your state or county be ripped off. If the feds are going to collect gas tax to build the highway system, I feel slightly better about it when I know that my local legislators could make them spend some of the money on new lanes on I-95 south, for example — which would be an earmark.

The Dept or Energy was created by Pres Carter in late 70’s with the explicit purpose if making the US energy self sufficient (solar, and nuclear) 35 years, 100’s of billions, both Rep and Dem Presidents and Congresses and they are still trying do it today. They have failed, Disband the Dept of Energy.

The Dept of Education has spent 100’s of billions in an attempt to improve our educatiopn system, all it has done is ensure are children are programmed by the government. Disband the Dept of Education.

Return the power to the STATES and the PEOPLE! The Federal Government has not solved a single problem in over a 100 years!